In a twist of irony, Big Government Bloomberg has admitted that NYC is at the edge of a fiscal precipice.

There is no practical ways to pay our workforce given the current environment, current tax structure, current other obligations we have more than what we have been doing, with the possible exception of dramatically raising taxes.

Bloomberg points to public service unions as being among the biggest roadblocks to any meaningful fiscal health in the city.

Currently in NYC, most of the unions are refusing to negotiate contracts right now. This is completely legal. If the contract is not re-negotiated, the current terms continue. The unions are trying to hold out for more money until a new mayor is elected, in the hopes that a new mayor will cave to their demands. One thing Bloomberg wantswhich is met with hostilityis to force union workers to pay part of the health care costs. Imagine that! Unless we do something those expenses will bankrupt us, Bloomberg said.

Living in NYC, I am no fan of Bloombergs at all. I do want to give him a little (tiny) credithes been sounding the alarm about this for the past few years. Even back in 2010, Bloomberg told CrainsNY that city pension funds have set unrealistically high assumed rates of return on investments, at 8%, which may require spending more than has been budgeted for retirement benefits The pension system itself provides defined benefits that cant be reduced under guarantees the Legislature has placed in the state constitution. While it permits new, less-expensive benefit tiers for future employees, savings wouldnt be realized for 10 or 15 years

Bloomberg will give the next mayor of New York City a balanced budget to begin the new mayoralty, however, what is missing from the balance sheet could present the most trouble for his successor. Over 100 contracts with unionized city workers have not been renegotiated for years, and liabilities are accruing for the city.

Auto-renewing of the contracts have keep city services going, but workers have not received pay raises or other benefits due to a series of failed negotiations. Tight finances beginning with the 2008 economic downturn broke a cycle of regular pay increases, setting the scene for todays growing conundrum, where Bloomberg is insisting the city does not have the money to pay for raises not awarded in years past.

The unions want retroactive pay raisesat an estimated cost of $7.8 billion. Labor wages, health benefits, and pensions for city workers as a whole represent 55 percent of the fiscal year 2014 budget.

Bloomberg has offered a raise going forward, albeit smaller than what the unions want, but he refuses to consider paying out billions in back pay. The fiscal year 2014 budget includes $265 million set aside in the citys labor reserve for union raises of 1.25 percent.

In a twist of irony, Big Government Bloomberg has admitted that NYC is at the edge of a fiscal precipice.

NYC has a fiscal crisis every other year. It gets kicked down the road, the politicians pat themselves on the back for fixing the problem, a couple years later NYC has yet another fiscal crisis. Repeat. This has been going on for decades.

NYC has a fiscal crisis every other year. It gets kicked down the road, the politicians pat themselves on the back for fixing the problem, a couple years later NYC has yet another fiscal crisis. Repeat. This has been going on for decades.

I predict the pattern will be repeated until some self-appointed genius cooks up the brilliant idea of demanding the nation bail out New York City.

NYC union pensions and benefits have just killed my husband’s job. Union employees also feel no need to actually do their jobs; they drink and backtalk their employers and bring frivolous law suits. They are part and parcel of what is killing America.

One must turn to the Ancient Byzantines for Tax solutions—They had a thing called a Sky Tax, a tax for walking around under the sky! The thing they need to Tax is poor people! If you want to end something—Tax it. Every welfare person should give 10 % to the city. pay it or move out.

I read. It’s the same story as today though? Thats how these crises run. We used to have new ones on quite the regular basis!
Here’s the flaw. The jurisdiction be it city or state always plans to at least equal the prior years spending. Thats how we can have some idiot claim a spending slowdown is the same as a spending cut. Of course when reality slaps one in the face sometimes it’s necessary to spend less. Lets say however they didn’t do that and instead slowly accumulated wealth. well i for one wouldn’t want that. It’s better than the alternative but it means we’re over taxed and nobody wants that.

30
posted on 05/13/2013 2:42:14 AM PDT
by wiggen
(The teacher card. When the racism card just won't work.)

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.